[NCUC-DISCUSS] Updates on ICANN67
John Gbadamosi
john at mediarightsagenda.org
Thu Mar 5 18:25:20 CET 2020
PR is a good alternative but accessibility of members from the global south
must be addressed in order to get all interested members onboard
On Wed, Mar 4, 2020 at 10:38 PM AMADU YUSIF <yamadu at ug.edu.gh> wrote:
> Defiantly, Caleb ICANN will do that, that will inform us the success of
> the meeting since this is first of its kind.
>
> Yusif
>
> Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.
>
>
> -------- Original message --------
> From: Caleb Olumuyiwa Ogundele <muyiwacaleb at gmail.com>
> Date: 04/03/2020 9:36 p.m. (GMT+00:00)
> To: Stephanie Perrin <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>
> Cc: NCSG discuss <NCSG-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu>, NCUC-discuss <
> ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org>
> Subject: Re: [NCUC-DISCUSS] Updates on ICANN67
>
> I do hope ICANN consider a post remote participation survey to get some
> feedback.
>
> Caleb Ogundele
>
> ________________
>
> Sent with thumbs from a small screen mobile device.
>
> Pelase exsuce typos adn errosr.
>
> On Wed, Mar 4, 2020, 5:19 PM Stephanie Perrin <
> stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca> wrote:
>
>> Thanks for jumping in, and long time no see Marilia! Indeed these are
>> great questions, and we will convey this in our discussion with the board
>> next week. We raised the issue of striking at working group to look at how
>> to improve virtual meetings, particularly important given the distinct
>> possibility that ICANN68 will also be cancelled if this virus continues to
>> be problematic.
>>
>> Even if we cannot get a community-wide effort to mobilize on the points
>> you raise, in my view we have to do it for NCSG because we are largely
>> volunteers and are hit hard by the cancellation of face to face
>> opportunities to build coalitions and policy positions.
>>
>> Stephanie Perrin
>>
>> NCSG Chair
>> On 2020-03-03 11:41 a.m., Marilia Maciel wrote:
>>
>> Hello everyone,
>>
>> Long time :) I could not resist to jump in, since remote participation
>> (RP) is a very dear topic to me. This was actually how I started to be
>> actively involved in Internet Governance back in 2007. After the IGF that
>> year, myself and a bunch of other youth (hey Rafik! :) that had been
>> supported to attend the meeting found ourselves with no support to continue
>> involved and we decided to work on improving remote participation at the
>> IGF. The adoption of a new platform, a more consistent methodology and IGF
>> hubs followed this effort.
>>
>> The sad Corona developments and the climate change crisis are creating a
>> new momentum in which enhanced RP has become a necessity. We need to 'save'
>> traveling for when traveling is strictly needed. A lot of improvements have
>> been achieved with RP in the last years. The whole experience was
>> disappointing and jittery back in 2007. Technology made large progress.
>> Methodology and know-how made some progress too. ICANN could provide a
>> remarkable testbed for the future of RP in this Corona and climate-aware
>> world. ICANN has three incredible assets: financial and technical
>> resources, and a pre-existing highly organised community.
>>
>> - Does ICANN have a strategic plan for this first time ever all-online
>> meeting? Can we access it, comment on it, make suggestions?
>>
>> - Does this strategy include technical elements as well as human
>> considerations? A flawless platform is not everything. People need to feel
>> engaged, motivated, immersed. These are human and psychological aspects.
>>
>> - Does ICANN have a contact person responsible for this strategy?Someone
>> who's taking the lead? Could we contact this person to share our thoughts
>> and concerns?
>>
>> - Can we expect that people will be given days-off from their jobs to
>> attend this online meeting? With the exception of the time needed to
>> actually travel, RP requires as much time and engagement as physical
>> meetings. If people are not allowed time off, their attention will
>> naturally be elsewhere. Perhaps our colleagues from other constituencies
>> will be exempted from work obligations to attend the online meeting, but
>> will NCSG members? Could ICANN help, for example, by providing a letter
>> that could be shared with the hierarchy in our jobs explaining why this
>> meeting will be online and that it will require as much dedication as a
>> physical meeting? Sometimes institutional backing helps.
>>
>> - I agree it is difficult to expect that people will put alarms in the
>> middle of the night and wander alone like zombies in their homes following
>> an online meeting. Is there still a chance to organise local ICANN hubs
>> (they could be backed by local ISPs, ISOC chapters etc), in which people
>> gather together in a physical place to take part in ICANN? The advantage
>> would be to maintain at least the local networking element, to make the
>> experience a bit more convivial, etc.
>>
>> - It is still expected that some people will only be partially available
>> during the day. Life kicks-in, there are kids to pick up and feed, for
>> example. How can NCSG organise preparatory thematic meetings to discuss
>> substance and positions in advance, so these people have the chance to
>> voice their opinions in a way that is duly summarised and conveyed by
>> NCSG's leadership during the meeting?
>>
>> Time is very short, but just a few questions for reflection.
>>
>> Looking forward to the experiment and to connecting with you.
>> Best,
>> Marilia
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 2, 2020 at 4:04 PM Bruna Martins dos Santos <
>> bruna.mrtns at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hey all,
>>>
>>> I dont know if we need a later-the-same-day-discussion and, as I pointed
>>> out in my previous email, what we are trying to address here is a problem
>>> we already face with the normal onsite meetings which is bridging our
>>> onsite participation with the one on remote.
>>>
>>> Schedule is out now <https://meetings.icann.org/en/remote67> and we
>>> have around 70 sessions, if im not forgetting any. But given that this time
>>> the meeting will be hosted roughly on 8 zoom rooms, with two of them only
>>> for either French or spanish speakers, to be used by GAC or ALAC. this adds
>>> a language barrier to our meetings or even some of the PDPs. Hence our idea
>>> of sharing information more actively on the list, but Im not too sure of
>>> what the model should really be.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> B
>>>
>>> Le lun. 2 mars 2020 à 11:42, Niels ten Oever <
>>> lists at digitaldissidents.org> a écrit :
>>>
>>>> Hi Stephanie,
>>>>
>>>> It might be me but, why do we need a later-the-same-day discussion
>>>> group? Ppl can put their alarm clock and stay up, in the same way as they
>>>> would with 'normal' or 'normal-remote' participation? Otherwise we could
>>>> perhaps be a bit more verbose in the chatlog in our public channel so
>>>> people can read the chatlogs?
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>>
>>>> Niels
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 3/2/20 3:04 PM, Stephanie E Perrin wrote:
>>>> > Well that sounds like you are volunteering to help organize a
>>>> later-that-same-day discussion group, Niels! :-D
>>>> >
>>>> > I think we need to do something to engage folks who are outside the
>>>> time zones (09:00-17:00 EST or Cancun time) as otherwise, we are stuck
>>>> listening to Zoom tapes. The transcription on Zoom must be robotic, it is
>>>> really pretty bad, so we need to help folks understand what when on that
>>>> day IMO.
>>>> >
>>>> > Stephanie
>>>> >
>>>> > On 2020-03-02 6:41 a.m., Niels ten Oever wrote:
>>>> >> Hi all,
>>>> >>
>>>> >> I am actually very excited about the remote meeting, since the
>>>> existing practice of a traveling circus does not really seem the best way
>>>> to create an inclusive and sustainable environment. I'd much rather shift
>>>> my times at home than traveling all around the world to do the same.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> What are the current chat / discussion channels and platforms people
>>>> use to discuss and navigate the meeting?
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Best,
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Niels
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> On 3/2/20 6:07 AM, Bruna Martins dos Santos wrote:
>>>> >>> I totally agree that, at this point we are facing a first time
>>>> experiment and it may not be as problematic to collapse the NCSG, NCUC or
>>>> NPOC meetings. But if the COVID situation continues to spread, we will most
>>>> likely face another virtual meeting and maybe it would interesting for us
>>>> as a Constituency and Stakeholder group to reassess this experience and
>>>> check what worked or not. As well as how to ensure participation
>>>> considering thelimited resources for translation services <
>>>> https://www.icann.org/news/blog/language-services-at-icann67?fbclid=IwAR3YQXqWvnt4lH8UXSTwvPSMW4bUAZRkKnofdLM9Vz5mdIiyRQURK4GnssY#.Xlu8mylZ8M0.facebook>,
>>>> for an example.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> My decision on cancelling the NCUC meetings was due to the fact
>>>> that we have members in a lot of places and adding the weight of
>>>> Constituency Meetings to this first experience could make it a bit harder -
>>>> due to the different timezones. Therefore the idea of hosting a members
>>>> call a few weeks later for us to reassess icann67 seemed like a better idea.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> In some ways, this experience might indeed be positive. Generally
>>>> speaking, those of us attending meetings onsite tend to get really caught
>>>> up with the work and f2f interactions that finding easy and authentic ways
>>>> of reporting the meetings to remote participants is something long overdue.
>>>> As mentioned by @Stephanie Perrin <mailto:
>>>> stephanie at digitaldiscretion.ca>, maybe we can think of a way to help
>>>> people who wont be able to be online and participate at the meeting live -
>>>> I would like to offer the Blog space at ncuc.org <http://ncuc.org> for
>>>> anyone willing to write short summaries of the sessions.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Best,
>>>> >>> Bruna Santos
>>>> >>> NCUC Chair
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Le sam. 29 févr. 2020 à 17:19, Mueller, Milton L <milton at gatech.edu
>>>> <mailto:milton at gatech.edu>> a écrit :
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Thanks to Bruna for keeping us updated on what is going on
>>>> with the all-virtual meeting, I guess we can call it the Zoom meeting.
>>>> Appreciate the explanation, and agree with many of your criticisms. ____
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> __ __
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> But in one sense I think is fine to collapse the NCSG and NCUC
>>>> meetings. I would not call that an abandonment of the NCUC, let’s just call
>>>> it a merger. I hope you as well as NPOC can stick some of their own things
>>>> into the agenda. And it don’t hurt us to discuss those things together.
>>>> Everyone knows I don’t believe there should be separate constituencies
>>>> anyway, just the unified SG. So it might do us good to meet together. ____
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> __ __
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> In that sense I agree with Benjamin that we can make lemonade
>>>> out of this lemon and maybe make use of the opportunity to improve the
>>>> multistakeholder model ____
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> __ __
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> __ __
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Dr. Milton L Mueller____
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Georgia Institute of Technology____
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> School of Public Policy____
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> IGP_logo_gold block____
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> __ __
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> __ __
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> __ __
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> *From:*Ncuc-discuss <ncuc-discuss-bounces at lists.ncuc.org
>>>> <mailto:ncuc-discuss-bounces at lists.ncuc.org>> *On Behalf Of *Benjamin
>>>> Akinmoyeje
>>>> >>> *Sent:* Friday, February 28, 2020 10:00 PM
>>>> >>> *To:* Bruna Martins dos Santos <bruna.mrtns at gmail.com <mailto:
>>>> bruna.mrtns at gmail.com>>
>>>> >>> *Cc:* NCUC Discuss <ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org <mailto:
>>>> ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org>>
>>>> >>> *Subject:* Re: [NCUC-DISCUSS] Updates on ICANN67____
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> __ __
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Dear Chair,____
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Thank you for the update. It is indeed a challenge, just like
>>>> every experiment is. Change is always constant, also in the face of the
>>>> health challenges, the world faces at this present time. ____
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Maybe we can make some lemonade out of this lemon without
>>>> hurting the MS model and rather improve it.____
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> __ __
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Kind regards,____
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Benjamin____
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> __ __
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> On Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 6:59 PM Bruna Martins dos Santos <
>>>> bruna.mrtns at gmail.com <mailto:bruna.mrtns at gmail.com>> wrote:____
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> We just got off another planning call, and with some new
>>>> updates:
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> 1. Number of sessions has been cut down from over 300
>>>> sessions to less than 75 - all in UTC-5. ____
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> __ __
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> 2. Upon request ICANN can provide zoom rooms with live
>>>> translation to both French and Spanish. But we need to gather within our
>>>> constituency whether there will be interest for any of the channels just so
>>>> ICANN can set up one for NCSG or if we could just join the ones being
>>>> facilitated to ALAC and GAC.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Please let me or @Maryam Bakoshi <mailto:
>>>> maryam.bakoshi at icann.org> know if you would like to attend the meeting
>>>> from either one of the channels - Spanish or French ones. ____
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> __ __
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Best regards, ____
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Bruna Santos ____
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> __ __
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> __ __
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Le ven. 28 févr. 2020 à 12:23, Bruna Martins dos Santos <
>>>> bruna.mrtns at gmail.com <mailto:bruna.mrtns at gmail.com>> a écrit :____
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Dear NCUC,
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> I just wanted to write you a short update on the
>>>> upcoming ICANN virtual meeting. As you're all aware, recently ICANN decided
>>>> to no longer host an onsite meeting and gave their staff and the Community
>>>> Leaders the - impossible - challenge of organizing in two weeks an virtual
>>>> meeting that should attempt at reproducing what would've been the schedule
>>>> of ICANN67.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> On that note some important things:
>>>> >>> (a) NCUC will no longer host any sessions during this
>>>> virtual meeting. On the interest of time and already foreseeing some
>>>> difficulties our members might have in following this meeting, we will host
>>>> our Members and EC session at a later date. ____
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> (b) ICANN67 Schedule will be shorter. Comm leaders
>>>> were asked to only keep strictly necessary sessions and the consensus
>>>> around the group was to keep mostly PDPs, Review Teams or any other
>>>> Cross-community work we deemed necessary.
>>>> >>> (c) Timezone will be Cancun TImezone - UTC -5 - and
>>>> the meeting will run for shorter hours than normal, from 9h00 to 17h00. ____
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> (d) Live Translation Services will only be provided
>>>> for English to Spanish + some live transcripts that could be translated. We
>>>> understand that decision should be slightly exclusionary for other
>>>> communities such as the Francophone community and maybe we could think of
>>>> ways of having our french speakers writing up summaries of the sessions to
>>>> be shared on the list. ____
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> __ __
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> With regards to the final schedule I believe ICANN
>>>> should be able to provide us a new one by the beginning of next week.____
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> __ __
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Last but not least, I would like to highlight how
>>>> problematic this experiment has been. Of course it is a first time for
>>>> ICANN and for us volunteers, but the decision of adapting the entire
>>>> schedule in two weeks is ambitious to say the least. I also fear that this
>>>> experiment ends up harming the MS model we have built ICANN around, whether
>>>> virtual or onsite, a lot of the communities interactions are being
>>>> sacrificed on behalf of this first experiment and I just hope we get to
>>>> have an onsite Kuala Lumpur meeting as well as a broader community
>>>> discussions about this first virtual meeting. ____
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> __ __
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> While I highly appreciate all the efforts being made
>>>> by David Olive, Tanzanica, the meetings team and Maryam in making sure our
>>>> priority meetings do make it to the schedule, (personal thought) I would've
>>>> wished for ICANN to just call this meeting of or even postpone it for us to
>>>> have a bit more time in discussing with our constituents what the
>>>> priorities should be and how to better adjust the schedule. ____
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> __ __
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> I will keep you all posted when there are more updates
>>>> on the virtual meeting. ____
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> __ __
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Best Regards,
>>>> >>> ____
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> __ __
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> -- ____
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> */Bruna Martins dos Santos /*____
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> __ __
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Skype ID: bruna.martinsantos____
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> @boomartins____
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> ____
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> __ __
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> -- ____
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> */Bruna Martins dos Santos /*____
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> __ __
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Skype ID: bruna.martinsantos____
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> @boomartins____
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> _______________________________________________
>>>> >>> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
>>>> >>> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org <mailto:
>>>> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org>
>>>> >>>
>>>> https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss____
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> --
>>>> >>> */Bruna Martins dos Santos /*
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Skype ID: bruna.martinsantos
>>>> >>> @boomartins
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> _______________________________________________
>>>> >>> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
>>>> >>> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
>>>> >>> https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>>>> >>>
>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>> > Ncuc-discuss mailing list
>>>> > Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
>>>> > https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Niels ten Oever
>>>> Researcher and PhD Candidate
>>>> Datactive Research Group
>>>> University of Amsterdam
>>>>
>>>> PGP fingerprint 2458 0B70 5C4A FD8A 9488
>>>> 643A 0ED8 3F3A 468A C8B3
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
>>>> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
>>>> https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> *Bruna Martins dos Santos *
>>>
>>> Skype ID: bruna.martinsantos
>>> @boomartins
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
>>> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
>>> https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> *______________________________*
>>
>> *Marília Maciel*
>>
>> Digital Policy Senior Researcher | DiploFoundation
>> WMO | 7bis, Avenue de la Paix | 1202 Geneva - Switzerland
>> MariliaM at diplomacy.edu | @MariliaM
>> www.diplomacy.edu
>>
>> [image: Upcoming courses] <https://www.diplomacy.edu/courses/>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ncuc-discuss mailing listNcuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.orghttps://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
>> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
>> https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
> https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>
--
John Gbadamosi
Programme Officer, Digital Rights
Media Rights Agenda
Internet of Rights (IoR) Fellow
Article 19, UK
+2348099817296
john at mediarightsagenda.org
@Samjohn70
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20200305/cb865fef/attachment.html>
More information about the Ncuc-discuss
mailing list